Re: Strafing. Having been through quite a few intensive conference sessions on CAS and heard the A-10 presentations... I agree that the gun is low collateral damage, but it also has limitations.
The final gun firing decision starts quite a long way from the target (rounds are fired at about 1 km IIRC) at an angle that foreshortens the view on the range axis. In at least one Blue-on-Blue that was briefed, what the rounds hit was on the same line as the target (error in range, not in azimuth).
This was an A-10 discussion - and the A-10 is draggy with huge speedbrakes, so presumably can dive more steeply and slower (less foreshortening and more think time) than an FJ.
At the same time, very low yield PGMs are being developed, that can even be redirected if they have a laser component. Even gunships are going to these.
Something on which I don't know the final answer: During the gun discussions and up to critical design review, there was a debate about the gun angle. Fighter jocks like a little upward bias, strafers level or down. (Again, I believe this is why the F-15 gun is little use in A-G although I am ready to be corrected.)
Engines - I was told that the Gatling switch was a through-life cost issue. The GAU-22/A (it was said then) used rounds that were already in DoD. (Of course, more recently, there's been a move to a new round because the existing ammo doesn't cover the full range of targets.)
And remember that there is no gunsight at all until they get the helmet fixed...
WhiteOvies - It would be a new version, for sure, but none of the individual components needs to be redesigned completely. It would basically be an A with a forebody made of a mix of C and A components.
Last edited by LowObservable; 30th Nov 2012 at 14:42.